Jon Huntsman and the Rise of the Republican Governors
Jon Huntsman will almost certainly not get the Republican nomination for president in 2012. It is not likely he will even be in the race past the Florida primary, tentatively set for January 31, 2012. He has little support among the Republican base, and outside of a very small subset of establishment types, no discernible support among any GOP voters.
But what makes his candidacy interesting is the attention being paid to it by the national media despite his near zero name recognition with Republican voters. One might be excused if they read all the coverage Huntsman has been getting and believed that he was a contender for the nomination. But the coverage of Huntsman is not necessarily about his chances of winning, but rather his political ideology — a center-right philosophy that won him two terms as governor of one of the most conservative states in the union.
Is Huntsman a dying breed of “Big Government” conservative? Or is he an outrider of a movement to make the GOP a more “government friendly” party? In essence, the GOP governors running or talked about for president — Romney, Pawlenty, Daniels, Jindal, Barbour — believe in utilizing conservative principles and applying them creatively to governing in order to make a leaner, sleeker federal government that might not be much smaller than what we have now, but would be better run and more responsible to the voters.
This is the kind of stuff the media likes to chew on when we’re a year or more out from actual voting and the personalities running for president leave much to be desired as far as charisma and excitement.
The excessive media coverage of Huntsman has many on the right believing that this is just one more example of the liberal press trying to force Republicans into choosing a loser like McCain, or at best, a candidate who is not a “true” conservative. The conspiracy theory goes that the press wants the GOP to run a “Democratic-Lite” candidate with little contrast to President Obama, thus giving the voter a choice between the real thing or the imitation — with predictable results.
No doubt, many in the press would like to believe they have that kind of sway over voters. More likely, Huntsman is the flavor of the week, and possesses an originality in his thoughts and on his resume that fascinates political junkies.
Huntsman, like many Republican governors, has gotten a reputation as an executive who gets things done by building consensus, engaging in careful negotiations, and presenting a non-ideological governing style that attracts independents and conservative Democrats. On paper, this makes Huntsman a challenger of some note. The theory is that because the Democrats are not going to primary the president, independents and dissatisfied Democrats will vote in Republican primaries in droves, thus moderating the electorate and diluting the impact of Tea Party types.
Many analysts point to New Hampshire as an example because the Granite State has an open primary where Republican party membership is not required to vote in the GOP contest. The early primary states of New Hampshire, South Carolina, and Michigan all feature such open primaries. Might a center-right candidate build momentum with victories in those early states and move on to capture the nomination?
The reality is a little different. Most open primaries are in southern states where Huntsman’s brand of conservatism wouldn’t go over any better with Democrats than it does with the Republican base. Also, there just aren’t enough open primaries for a Republican candidate to win the nomination. Any realistic path to victory for Huntsman would include winning in closed primary states where he scores poorly against other candidates in the field, and where there is actual resentment against his candidacy from the base of the party.
You media folks can blow hot air up inside Jon Huntsman for as long and as hard as your lips and lungs can manage it, but that lead ballon is NOT gonna fly, as badly as the Obama campaign would love for it to.
If ever there was an election cycle that a Democrat posing as a Republican has no chance to be the GOP nominee, this is it.
Jeez, I thought faux “news” garbage like this was the sort of thing Pajamas Media was created *not* to produce? If we wanted regurgitated stories on the GOP put out by the Obama Administration, we could just read the NYT or Politico. Whoever is made the editorial decisions here might want to give a thought to how much damage worn-out tripe like this story does to PJM’s brand.
davidinvirginia,
While I hope neither Huntsman nor Romney get’s the nomination, there is one fact at this stage of the game that is not the fault of PJ Media or even Fox…. Rhinos are a Reality. In a head to head with the current front runner, Huntsman would clean Romney’s clock. He’s a better speaker, better looking, more sincere and just may be the guy who prevents Romney from getting the nomination. If he can accomplish that, he will have served his purpose. Also, those of us further right need to keep in mind that we’ll need the Rhinos among us to beat Obama in 2012. So let’s not be too offended by our misguided friends to our left. There is no perfect candidate. And who among us is completely devoid of Rhino tendencies? Not me. Perhaps you?
huntsman’s in because his family is upset Romney got the Olympics, when they wanted little jonny to have it, and Romney did such a great job! Let’s see he dropped out of high school (Highland in case your interested)(did he get a ged, or did his dad donate to the universities he was accepted at?); dropped out of one university and ended at another with a degree in ID; dropped out of his office as gov of Utah to serve obama; dropped out of that to (oh, let’s see what haven’t I done yet? – that’s right the presidency)run for president! Man, he’s our man! Don’t anyone criticize Sarah any more – she left because she was being hounded and sued by libs. huntsman has fallen way, way away from the family tree.
Huntsmans’ plan is to suck air from the Republican primary, then call Republican’s extremists and run as an independent to make sure Obama gets elected after all.
Moran knows this and is doing his part to oppose conservatives and help Obama.
What a great journolist his is . . .
“A new breed of GOP governors are pragmatic technocrats rather than partisan ideologues.”
Translation: How RINOs infect and destroy our country.
WTH is so new about them? Hoover was a progressive entitlement pimp of the Karl Rove style. Nixon imposed price controls for god sake. Big government Republicans have been drinking deep from government trough since the civil war.
… and Nixon signed the National Environmental Policy Act into law which gave rise to the EPA and other regulatory bodies.
Exactly. Nice try, Moran. A joke of a piece.
“In essence, the GOP governors running or talked about for president — Romney, Pawlenty, Daniels, Jindal, Barbour — believe in utilizing conservative principles and applying them creatively to governing in order to make a leaner, sleeker federal government that might not be much smaller than what we have now, but would be better run and more responsible to the voters.”
Big Government or Statism if you prefer is like kudzo. It doesn’t ask you if it can enter your life,your business, your children’s future it just does.
Maybe the problem the establishment Republicans and their liberal friendly candidates are having with the conservative base is that conservatives don’t believe that you can stop kudso without pulling it out by the roots.
nickel,
I consider myself a conservative in almost every instance…. yet I’m Pro-Choice. Does that make me a Rhino?
Does being “pro choice” make you a RINO?
If you believe that governments should not prosecute those involved in abortions — No.
If you believe that organizations involved in providing abortions should get taxpayers subsides — Yes
If you believe that Roe v Wade is a wise interpretation of the Constitution and should remain forever as part of our jurisprudence — HELL YES.
Well Bill,
I pass your first two Rino tests, but I’m afraid I may be a disappointment to you on the third. Forever is a long long time, so I would not be willing to commit to forever. And I would not defend the wisdom of the Roe v Wade decision beyond stating that I would not support overturning it today. So, what say you? Am I a Rino?
If you feel Roe v Wade should not be overturned you are a RINO. Sorry.
It’s not even a matter of abortion. It’s a matter of the Constitution and things like federalism and being part of a representative republic.
Bill,
How does that square with your assertion that Governments should not prosecute those engaged in abortion? Or, are you saying that’s the only position available to a Republican that won’t get them the RINO label… as far as you’re concerned?
How does that square with your assertion that Governments should not prosecute those engaged in abortion?
That’s not my assertion. If it were up to me I’d take anyone who accepts money for performing abortions and make them rot in jail.
I do, however, think that those who don’t agree with my view and feel that government should stay out of it have points to be considered. If they are willing to let them be considered by a legislative body they would not be someone I’d reject out of hand as a candidate, and hence would not be defined by me as a RINO.
Someone, however, who says a legislature may not consider a matter because, because, because, well, just because, just because, it’s in a penumbra, yeah, that’s the ticket, a penumbra, is a RINO.
Someone who defends finding things in the Constitution that aren’t there for what they might think is a greater social good is not someone we should want in office.
In addition to this post, later you argue that doctors who perform abortions for money be prosecuted. O.K. if they do it for free??
1. As another comment here pointed out, as long as the abortion is in the timeframe of CONSTITUTIONALLY DECREED law, how can you as supposed conservative constitutionalist justify this? [I know how of course--most people are quite comfortable quoting the Constitution when it supports what they want, and then excusing its non-enforcement when it disagrees with them.] In this connection did you think assassination of Kansas abortion doctor was (a) outrageous, given that he was constitutionally allowed to do it, or (b) deserved what he got and assassin should have gotten off on grounds of justifiable homicide?
2. Why only the abortionist? Why not the mother who got herself pregnant and then hired the abortionist? I believe when mobs are prosecuted the head guy gets prosecuted right along with his hired gun. Seems to me mom deserves punishment at least as much as HER hired gun.
Until pro-lifers stop saying abortion is murder then weasel out when it comes to calling the woman who made the decision a murderer–they’re dishonest. Roe-Wade is just about as good a bill one could have in a MULTI CULTURAL/ETHNIC DIVERSE nation. To go the way of the pro-life fringe (which is always there ready to move to the next predssure point) is to end up like China with gauleiters on every block having women check in monthly to be sure they haven’t “murdered” fertized sperm. If that sounds preposterous, there ARE fringe pro-lfe activits calling for considering contraception murder.
The answer? Pro-life movement needs to push for a constitutional amendment declaring abortion murder with all that requires and see if you can get it passed. Until then, what we have is about as good as it’s going to get and both the pro-life, and extremist anti-abortion people who want right to abortion to exist until birth — need to get real.
aurora,
I’d like to think the Republican Party is a big enough tent to allow in both Pro-Life and Pro-Choice voters. I’m about as conservative as you can get, don’t like abortion and wish they never happened, but I can’t say how much I’d resent Government intrusion into a decision my daughter might be struggling with in the event she was dealing with an unwanted pregnancy. Yet on this Blog some consider me a RINO.
“Is Huntsman a dying breed of “Big Government” conservative? Or is he an outrider of a movement to make the GOP a more “government friendly” party?”
Huntsman is a RINO. And the reason why he’s the darling of the main stream media is because A) He’s just like John McCain, and B) He’s just like John McCain. The main stream media knows that if the Republicans nominate another John McCain they will lose just like they did in 2008. Why go for a liberal Republican when you can have a real liberal in Obama? They know that Huntsman would never fly with the base of the Republican Party. So the main stream media is trying to help this guy along so that he could get the nomination and split the indepenedents and Republicans (those liberal and Conservative) and allow Obama to win. If the country really, really, wanted a center RINO Republican, then McCain should have won in a landslide. But he didn’t and just look at what we ended up with. Nope, this is the main stream media’s attampt to divide and conquer the Republican Party.
Voters need to have a clear choice in 2012. They can either follow Obama’s liberal policies that are literally bankrupting this nation, or they can try a real conservative and put a stop to this insanity right now. I think the country will make the right choice in 2012 and go conservative, assuming a real conservative gets the nomination. This is no time to go soft, Republicans. Do the RIGHT thing and stick with the conservatives.
Libertyship46,
“Why go for a liberal Republican when you can have a real liberal in Obama?”
I strongly suspect you’re not really advocating the above. But us right wingers need to remember there is a really, really good reason to go for even a liberal Republican over Obama….. the SCOTUS appointments the next president is likely to get. Wouldn’t it be nice to replace Ruth Bader Ginsburg with a conservative Justice. Wouldn’t that turn the lefties inside out? Don’t get me wrong, I favor Cain, West, Johnson, Perry, Bachmann, Christie, Palin, Rubio, Giuliani, Gingrich, Santorum, Pawlenty, Paul, Huntsman and Romney in that order. But any one of them would be a better choice than Obama. While I understand the desire to push for a more conservative candidate, I don’t understand the “Purist” philosophy expressed here. Tell me Libertyship46…. are you completely devoid of all Rhino tendencies completely? You admit to yours and I’ll admit to mine.
Yeah, if Obama gets reelected, we might end up with another left-wing judge on the Supreme Court like Justice Stevens, Justice Souter, or even Justice Brennan. Oh, wait, those were Justices nominated by liberal to moderate Republican presidents.
What was your point again?
Well a liberal Republican will probably raise taxes a smidgen less than Obama and continue to allow the Federal government to stifle the economy, but maybe not as a aggressively. Then Democrats and the media can blame all our problems on Republicans. That sounds like a winning strategy if I ever heard one. Yep, we should elect a liberal Republican all right.
This guy is toast. So is romney. What they forget is that the public has been tormented for the last two plus years by this administration. Cap and trade, EPA, fuel prices, shutting down energy industry, callus handling of the Louisiana drilling disaster and finally the debacle rammed down our throats called ObamaCare. Over 20% unemployment and our reputation abroad sucks.
No we are not gentlemenly and kindly reaching across the isle to shake the hands of our tormentors. Huntsman is full of crap. We are fighting mad and the only way to rid our government of these scum bags is to tell the truth and hit them between the eyes. Over and over until these scumbags are out of office.
Just say NO to playing softball and rolling over with an Obama lite candidate!!
tommy gun,
I favor a strong military… as do most strong conservatives. Yet a strong military is expensive and is an example of Big Government. Does that make me and others who support a strong military a Rhino? I ask sincerely. I respect your opinions.
No advocating a strong military is not being a RINO because the constitution requires that the federal government defend the country and one of the truly constitutional functions of the federal government, this would include secure borders.
The general welfare clause has been distorted to include giving money from taxpayers to non taxpayers for cell phones to deadbeats, drunks and drugs addicts getting SSI for their own self inflicted disability, teens getting WIC and food stamps, housing subsidies, homeless programs, and tons of wasted money on “The War on Poverty” that we seem to be getting more of each decade, but I digress!
No sir you are not a RINO defense of this nation is one of the primary responsibilities of our federal government!
Thanks Steve.
What people like Rick Moran don’t understand is that the current financial crisis is as a result of a media driven left wing culture which eschews personal responsibility. A technocrat can’t solve this problem. Only the election of an unabashed conservative who is prepared to attempt to restore American values can return America to its greatness. Such a person has been vilified by the media because they know her rise will reduce their sinister influence.
And unlike Huntsman, the next conservative leader understands the profound damage Obama has done to the nation’s treasury and position in the world. Such a person does not respect Obama. She loathes him and the media which conned the public to put him into power.
No more “Democrat Lites” for us, thank you very much. They’re part of the problem, certainly not part of the solution.
He’s got more baggage than most can carry. Let’s start with charisma – he lacks it. Then you look at some of his appointments beside Josh Reid – many are dubious at best; boistrous, inexperienced and arrogant. and when he talked to our group about the issues, he was not decisive on how he would approach critical issues like jobs and he’s clueless on Yucca.
An article about Republican governors with NO mention of the absolute BEST, most conservative governor in this country, Rick Perry? Boooooooooooooo
Rick
Ok so you have the talent time and interest to study and write on such things
but really, when the country is falling off of a cliff fiscally you are selling the idea that learning how to manage the behemoth better is a good thing?
I think you are behind the general mood that is developing in the public that the government really does need to be tamed – that means really cut down to size
you sound like an apologist for those that think its not all that bad or that it just cannot be changed and we should learn to live with it – aka surrendering – it seems it is too late for that
Every call to “give up your partisan ideology” contains the unspoken words “…and adopt mine instead”.
yeah… the lame stream media can now get into the Hunstman wagon -he is there to neutralize Romney; in the same way the media prefer Bachmann (to neutralize Palin); and at the end get Obambi re-elected.
John Huntsman is not a new breed of Republican governor at all; indeed, he is a wishy-washy opportunist carefully crafting his paradoxical stances in order to get maximum political potential. In other words, John Huntsman is part of the blue blood Republican elite. He’s a RINO. My name for him is Huntsman McRINO. Everyone else can see through this pretender as he tries to take a credible stand; he’s burnt toast ready for the trash. That’s where he belongs.
Besides, his family cannot give to Senator Harry Reid’s campaign & claim to be a Republican. This is why Senator Reid supports Huntsman McRINO. Jimmy Carter also endorses Huntsman McRINO. That’s 3 strikes against him thus far.
Rick Moran has a thought provoking article on Jon Huntsman and the Rise of the Republican Governors. He gets a lot of grief in the comments, which is to be expected because of the venue. The Conservative base is angry and most people are very, very concerned about the direction the Nation is headed. A majority say that we are headed in the wrong direction.
But is there anything particularly wrong with electing a pragmatic centrist Republican governor as President? Jon Huntsman has, after all, demonstrated the ability to do a good job managing the affairs of Utah.
In ordinary times, a Jon Huntsman may be a perfectly good choice. But these are not ordinary times. The country is in the middle of an economic crisis unparalleled since the Great Depression. The country is not looking for someone who can keep the country perking along on the track it’s on. With over 9% unemployment and about 20% underemployment, the American people are not looking for a manager, but a game changer. A few years ago, gold was the exclusive province of the “Gold Bugs.” Today, ordinary people are putting gold funds in their portfolios as an inflation hedge. They are buying gold and silver coins in fear of the collapse of the currency. They are checking out the back yard to see if they have enough to grow vegetables in case things get really bad. There have been reports of ammunition shortages; does that tell you anything about the concerns ordinary people have?
Managers are the people you hire when you need to do more of what you have been doing, but doing it a little better, a little more efficiently. When the wheels have come off, as they seem to be doing in America today, people are looking for a “turnaround artist.” They are looking for someone who has a new vision and a determination to right what’s gone wrong. When, and if, the country’s back on track the people will be ready for a competent manager.
Sorry, Jon, it’s just not your time.
I’d put this milktoast tripe on par with a John Avalon snipe about the current rable in the streets misinterpretations that, besides filthy lucre by way of writing for a living, serve as comfort and amunition to attack conservatives on all fronts.
The tragedy in Tuscon aside, which like the tragedies in Colorado and Virginia before it became more about appropriating violence to use in the cause of ‘incivility’ rather than truly reflecting any urgent social breakdown in our politics, Rick Moran’s contentiousness is typical given his Chicagoan perspective. What’s next Moran – you gonna get a job with the Big City Machine at home?
It’s just another in Moran’s ‘NO LABLES’ move to the left, as if someday Joe Scarborough and Miki B. are gonna let him in the club.
What great acomplishments did Huntsman have in Utah? In a state founded and to this day dominated – commercially as well as politically – by and for Mormans, please do tell…what great challenges did he best to wind up on the coveted Forbes list and the like?
To even mention Huntsman in the same breath as Daniels, Jindal, Barbour, Romney, and to a lessor degree (in time served) Chistie is an insult to the intelligence of an informed readership.
This, an informed readership, along with the vibrant political involvement of newly informed and engaged Tea Party patriots, is the problem for folks like Rick Moran & Monnyrunner.
This cannard of ‘political incivility’ and attendant baloney like what Moran is pushing is a narrative that pines for the good old bad old days when politics was mainly left up to the ‘professionals.’ The whole point of the Tea Party Rising, and it’s NON-VIOLENT effect on pressuring the Republican Party to return to conservatism, is that the ‘professionals’ are the root of what is ruining the country.
These professional politicians have been protecting and enriching themselves at the expense of everyday Americans. Obama’s 1st years in office was merely the tipping point given his statism. Bush was guilty in many ways before him. Now Republicans must atone going forward – or deal with ‘unemployment’.
Look, Huntsman might have been an interesting addition if this was 1995, or even 2003. AS it stands now he isn’t anything remotely emblematic of what Moran strains to pouff him up into. There was nothing exceptional during his time in Utah at all – he was a workman-like competent leader who did a decent enough job during prosperous times.
Writers like Rick Moran are always looking to glom onto John Avalon’s lucrative gig kicking conservatives in the gluts – but besides Avalon marrying into the eastern republican establishments ‘legacy’ family gettin a yes from Maggie Hoover, having first honed his bull as a Gulliani servant – this is a group that is always retreating much like Jon Stewart does when claiming to be ‘just a comedian’ after trying to fly on thin facts. Instead of ‘just comedians’ they are just the ‘decent conservatives’ trying to reclaim a decent conservatism from all these toothless hillbillys that have overrun the formerly great and relevant Republican party.
You Know, all those little people who vote and actually DO THINGS to make this country great.
John Huntsman took the ambassadorship to China because it was good for John Huntsman and good for biz back in Utah – and – unlike say a former senator from the east who refused to join Obama’s cabinate ONCE HE FOUND OUT ABOUT THE THUGS OBAMA SURROUNDED HIMSELF WITH – and the plans they had for using Acorn and the Census as a means to facilitate massive voter fraud while enlisting latino’s to the biggest Democrat Party immigrant recruitment drive since Lincoln and the Irish (then it was a infant GOP playing the race card) – withdrew and openly explained in the media his reasons why – in the process this time around Huntsman both indicted his reputation while proving himself to be shallow and ambitious.
His entrance into the presidential ring only further proves as much. Beside amplifying that Republicans have a problem going forward that the biased MSM are unfortunately right about -that it is a weak field that aids even Obama’s possible re-election.
And Moran’s post only further proves that he doesn’t get it – or belong at PJ Media pushing such a cocimamie theory as this one with Huntsman.
These are glorious days, the days of PJ Media and Andrew Breitbart and so much more exciting possiblities. Not since the early advent of the the Goldwater movement, and in my humble opinion much more important.
There is no impending civil breakdown like the early sixties either!
It is a great time to be alive and be a conservative who cares about this country – and wants to do something positive about it. In fact, despite dolts like Moran, there has never been a better time, nor more oppertunities to do so.
We are enjoying a great conservative revival in this country. The Blogs, the Tea Party, the great victory congressionally in ’10 and even more so at the state level. It’s social, religious, political, cultural and it’s fantastic.
And Huntsman is barely on the fringe. He doesn’t represent anything but Huntsman, and the MSM facination with him is exactly due to their desire to hold back any possible conservative rival to oppose Obama. It’s not so much a conspiracy as it is a robotic reflex.
Rick Moran is out to lunch and an embarassement – a fraternal brother with Ruben Navarrette (and as already mentioned, the DAILY BEAST’S & MSNBC puking head Avalon).
Literally his post is a joke – as is he.
Pssst, Rick. He’s not a Republican.
“pulling the levers and turning the wheels of power in order to effect a desired result”
the is exactly the kind of tinkering and planning advocated and demanded by collectivists of all kinds
huntsman was interviewed in saturday’s wsj and not once did he ever mention the us constitution as the basis/parameter for government’s involvement in anything
this guy is a shill to the big government establishment
The votes are in: Rick Moran is a big loser, and PJM needs to let him go, along with Reuben Navarette.
If PJM takes that advice, this Blog will have marginalized itself out of all relevancy.
Leftist Plant alert!
I agree. He’s a plant.
rance,
You cut me to the bone!
I suspect you and the Sheikh are the real plants here. The ideological intransigence emanating from your posts is claustrophobic.
Sheikh Radlan Rol,
Why, How Dare You!!!!
Huntsman is a progressive pampered son of wealth. And the author says this is new in the Republican party.
Disqualifying factor#1- He was endorsed by Harry Reid. What, they couldn’t dig up the corpse of Leon Trotsky for an endorsement? How in this jacked up ,confused time in which we live, anyone could imagine a Dingy Harry endorsed candidate could get the GOP nomination is beyond comprehension.
I think Dingy Harry’s endorsement is just an example of Mormon’s sticking together. I don’t think Dingy did Huntsman any favors with his endorsement.
$25,000 to his 2010 campaign is not an endorsement? I don’t think so. This is why Senator Reid endorses Jon Huntsman.
Sebastian,
I’ve heard that $25k came from Huntsman’s rich father. Mormons have a history of sticking together when it comes to politics. I doubt you’ll hear much about it from Huntsman’s campaign…. Reid no longer enjoys the bi-partisan support he once had.
No core conviction Huntsman types are a significant factor in why America is in the dire straits it is today.
I should have guessed that uber-squish Rick Moran was behind such an article.
the purity of the GOP “base” is just as destructive as the fascisti left that gave us Obama.
America held hostage by the extremes while the fifty percent of us who are yearning for leadership instead of ideological purity just want all of you red meat screamers to stop destroying what remains of America.
I would prefer a military coup instead of yet another anti-incumbent presidency.
May the voters of New Hampshire save us all…
You would prefer a military coup? Have you thought that through? A coup would not be done by the Left. No, it would be by the Small-government, Fundamentalist-Christians bitter-clingers, the folks who are like our Founding Fathers. These are the people you label as “holding America hostage” and “extreme”.
If not for our bitter-clinger, “extreme rightwing” Founding Fathers, America would not exist as a separate free country.
Today’s Conservatives and Libertarians are the heirs to the Founding Fathers. We are holding the line against those who would re-establish tyranny in this country. We hold the line against those who seek to use government for their own selfish purposes. We are holding the line against those who would undermine our culture and its values. We are the 2nd American Revolution. If we were ever to stop, you would rapidly find yourself in chains. We are ALL that stands between you and enslavement. We are the good guys.
But WE are the problem? Buddy, you better take a good, long look in the mirror. You’re the guy who just wants put his head in the sand like an ostrich and have danger pass you by. You are one of those “cold and timid souls” who stand for nothing.
Grow some balls. Pick a side. Join the fight. “Can’t we all just get along?” No, we can’t.
“We win. They lose.” – Reagan
Are you a lefty? You sure sound like one. The phrase “Ideological Purity” is used to make “commitment to principles” sound evil. Its the creation of Marxist propagandist. If one compromises on truth, one looses!
If I was to write an article promoting Huntsman to a base that he needs to win over, it would certainly not look anything like this one.
As with all recent pronouncements by Rick Moran, it is arrogant, obnoxious and in your face toward the conservative base, it is short on facts and long on antagonism.
It is a heat seeking missive, looking to unearth the very responses of “I HATE RINO’S!!!!!” and detonate them for all to see.
It also waters down and whitewashes a)the role, intent and motives of the despicable acts and conduct of the lapdog media; the global warming hoax and its now deteriorating scientific foundational underpinnings; and the very real and legitimate concerns of faith based people in this country….and the routine and rather atrocious manner in which those concerns…and worse…they as people…are treated.
Huntsman has much to admire in his candidacy. His position on taxation and his attack on the idiotic tax code is among them. He has a greater grasp on how China is positioning itself and what our debt to China may mean on a larger scale. His support for civil unions for gays is not out of the range with an increasing number of folks on the center-right.
He has a problem with one or two issues on illegal immigration. Damning him with faint praise, suggesting that big government isn’t a major problem and that the “base” is too “extreme”…(which, yet again, is the snarling undercurrent of this piece of tripe)…isn’t going to get anyone to do anything but dig their heels in more deeply.
In reality, Huntsman is more naturally conservative than Romney and Romney is the current frontrunner. The “base” is indeed electing Thune, Christie, Jindal, Noem, Cantor, Ryan, …the new breed is a thinking man’s treasure trove.
We ought to be celebrating that difference from the bizarre, frothing, imbecilic grunge of Anthony Weiner, Pete Stark, Barbara Jackson Lee…and the vomitus leanings of Janeane Garafolo, Michael Moore, Sean Penn, the Daily Duranty and MSNBC.
I like it.
“the snarling undercurrent of this piece of tripe”
“that difference from the bizarre, frothing, imbecilic grunge of…”
Seriously, cf, you need your own blog, or you should write for a living. I can write, but it is prose, while you write poetry.
Marc,
I’d be interested to read your thoughts about Cain, Bachmann, West, Johnson, Perry and Paul…. and any other candidate you might consider who may, or may not, meet your purity test. Let’s throw Giuliani in there just for fun.
I would like to assure Rick Moran that if Mitt Romney or Huntsman garner the GOP nomination, I WILL NOT cast a vote for President, and I am not alone. I will also not stop repeating my argument.
Either of these candidates will simply attempt to tap the brakes on the Progressive agenda and attempt to slow it down while preaching reason and civility to an irrational and uncivil Left.
I would much rather try and take both houses of congress and leave the buffoon that is Barack Obama in office than continue down the road to serfdom with a “moderate” that will invariably fail and leave the door wide open for another European Socialist to come along and “save us all.”
When I make this argument, I consistently hear that I’m subjecting candidates to some sort of “purity test,” and that a more conservative candidate is “unelectable.” Nonsense, and shame on you if you make that accusation. You can’t tell me with a straight face that there isn’t a happy medium well to the right of Romney (Romneycare, AGW apologist, Shari’a denier)that can be filled by a Michelle Bachmann or a Rick Perry.
If the GOP can’t get behind a rationally conservative candidate and insists on nominating “moderate bridgebuilder,” then it’s time for the GOP to undergo a TRUE overhaul.
Bumr50,
I absolutely agree that there are many very good choices to the right of Romney and Huntsman. And I myself strongly prefer them. However, Obama is far, far to the left of these two. He has caused great damage in a very short time and will cause much more if re-elected. He will certainly appoint one, and probably two, Justices to the Supreme Ct. And I bet his appointments will be to the left of Ruth Bader Ginsburg. Would that be worth leaving the buffoon in office for another term?
Yes, it would. I do not accept permanent partial destruction of our nation as an alternative to temporary, full destruction of our nation. I do not choose between a greater defeat and a lesser defeat. I choose between victory or defeat.
I would rather the tyrant with his clearly mailed fist be in charge directly, rather than be ruled by his puppet of the velvet glove. I embrace not those who would seek to make our yoke more comfortable and who applies the lash less liberally. I do not seek to be made comfortable in my chains.
If I am to be tyrannized, then let it be full tyranny, not the kinder, gentler variety. Give me the harsh overseer, that I might hate him fully. Give me not the gentler overseer, whom I might embrace as my fellow man.
It is “Give me Liberty or give me Death!” It is not “Give me Liberty… or at least give me lighter chains.”
Marc: you are sooooo wrong! There will not be a country to pick up and streighten out if obama gets in again. He will do what soros, the puppet master, demands and heaven help us. I am not willing to let him appoint another lib to the supreme court. They will do more damage than he ever thought of doing.
However, huntsman has no chance! Only if they stop us from voting. He supported mccain and mccain people are working for him. His dad, however, supported Romney. Kind of funny since they are all in the tank for jonny jr.
And Wayne, maybe you ought to talk to people who went to school with the huntsmans and how they always stated, that dad would get them out of any problems.
I admire his dad, but I’m beginning to wonder about his support for jon. I know you want to support your children, but just the same. . . . .
Marc and Goldi,
I do not favor Huntsman. I will vote for him only if he gets the nomination. But if he gets it I will vote for him. Obama is the clearest enemy of freedom to ever cast a shadow in the WH. Tell me Marc: Have you no Rhino tendencies at all? Not even one little one? And what candidate running for the Republican side doesn’t? Do you have a purity test you require all candidates to pass before they would have your support?
By the way Marc….. you have a poetic flair yourself.
Yes, I have a “purity test”. I rule out any candidate who demonstrates a tendency to reach for big-government solutions to things. Words mean nothing. Obama got elected based on lies and hollow rhetoric. I look for the mask to slip, so I know what lies beneath.
I will vote for some candidates, but not others. I set the bar high, so that even if a candidate falls short, I still get something far better. Aim high. Also keep an absolute minimum target in mind.
To use an analogy, the Repubs promised $100bil in cuts. They asked for $61bil. They got a putative $38.5 bil. They ended with a statistically insignificant number. They should have asked for the maximum of $452 bil. They should have demanded and demanded it. They’d have gotten $100bil or more.
You simply have to demand more in order to get more. If you do not, no one will take you seriously. If we do not absolutely demand an actual Conservative, we will get another McCain. If we are not willing to walk, we will not get our raise… and someone else will. I am willing to walk.
Also, this is a crisis. Either we use it to get what we want, or they will use it to get what they want. They have far more experience at this. We need to be quick studies. We must not let them use our fear of the worst against us. We must not give in to fear of failure, nor to fear of success.
Thank you for the kind words about my writing.
“A new breed of GOP governors are pragmatic technocrats rather than partisan ideologues.”
Huntsman is not a new breed of Governor. As for the rest of this claim, it’s code for – he’s a progressive republican. He let Utah down and there’s a reason huntsman declared his candidacy on the east coast.
no he ain’t,
Please be specific as to how he let Utah down.
Pragmatic? Here’s some pragmatism for you. Consider how much the average American understands about the Mormon faith. Have a look at the Joseph Smith story and some of the basic controversies that will come up. The hard left will use all of it. If they run Huntsman up now, they are thinking their counter strategies dovetail. One stone, two birds.It is a tough little world out there and the Left isn’t going to walk away from all that free money without a great deal of nastiness. This isn’t my sentiment, the Left has a long history of opposition to Christianity, I’m thinking France, 1792?
Mr Huntsman, don’t let the sagebrush snap you in the butt on the way out.
Gallifet,
You’re absolutely right. The left will demand political correctness from our side and if we give it to them we’re fools. They will offer no such courtesy once our candidate has been chosen. If either Romney or Huntsman get it, just wait and see what they’ll do to the Mormon religion. And they won’t be constrained by the truth. Not that there aren’t sufficient skeletons in the closet of Mormonism to provide them all the ammunition they’ll need. If we don’t vet these two in the Primaries, neither will have a chance in the General. That’s unacceptable to me.
When Romney ran in Massachusetts, his Mormonism was NEVER made an issue. I grant you that the Presidential will draw more critics crawling out from under rocks, so why not go with someone less vulnerable…like Palin?
Alas, you guys talk big and the Tea Party kicked butt in the last election, bu I think you are misreading the upcoming election in which voters may be looing to move away from Obama, if given a credible moderate alternative. Hell, McCain would probably beat Obama if the situation had been that Obama’s party was seen as responsible for the bad economy. You guys are bound and determined to put someone in there to whom the center will say, “no way!” Mark Malone is intoxicated by Patrick Henry, who voted AGAINST the Constitution. Marc also reveres the Founders, most of whom were Federalists, whom Patrick Henry was against. I think that you should ride Rick Moran out of town on a rail, tar and feather him as if he were a British customs agent. The guy is obviously a Tory. I would drive him out of the country, take his property, and sell it to support the cause of Liberty. Appeal to Heaven while you are at it.
Dwight,
You make some good points. Last GOP Presidential Primary it came down to three guys: Huckabee, Romney and McCain. All three are now reviled as RINOs. Certainly that is the case here on PJM. I see why they get that label. But for me it is not the kiss of death it is for most contributors on this blog. Until Huckabee dropped out, I thought he would be the most electable. I would agree that electability is not the only factor when considering a candidate, but it should certainly be one of the factors considered. Of all the Republican candidates, who would be your top five?
Romney (the only one I know well because he was our Governor for a couple terms.) Pawlenty….. maybe. I have never to my knowledge heard Huntsman speak. I have heard Bachman a few times, most of which were terrible, but the very last time was better. Romney knew that to win in Mass., he had to be what is called here a RINO. It is exactly what could win him the general in 2012, but the Patrick Henry’s on PJM would have to be dragged kicking and screaming in the primaries and would rather be given…death. Or so you would think, were they taken seriously.
This thread is cool because you can feel them starting to get heady with their own voodoo (economics and otherwise.) Sure, if Sarah Palin could give a clear exposition on how she made things work in Alaska, (which is what I had such high hopes for when she first appeared with McCain,) but instead she has over-impressed tea party types with goofy jingoism and you betchas and under-impressed those of us who were looking for a credible governing executive. If she was one, then why doesn’t she act like one? Calvin Coolidge, she ain’t.
Christie is fascinating and appears to have what it takes, but unless Anne Coulter seduces him, he’s supposedly not running. The fact that Ann Coulter and I might agree on a candidate is the most disturbing thought of the night.
I think I’ll go put my tooth under the pillow. I may not get a quarter, but maybe I’ll get (Mr) Lucky.
Dwight,
All the RINO positions he took to get Gov. of Taxachusettes are now coming back to haunt him. In spite of all that, he could still beat Obama if he could get the nomination. In fact, he might be the most electable Republican. However, the Dems are going to attack him where they hate him most….his Christianity. And the Mormon strain of Christianity is almost as vulnerable to attack as is Islam. I am somewhat surprised to hear his religion wasn’t challenged in your state when he ran for Governor. Perhaps New England liberals take political correctness to heart more than liberals elsewhere do. I like Christie too, but he’s not running… yet. What do you think of Herman Cain. So far I like what I’ve seen and heard.
Wayne wrote: “In fact, he might be the most electable Republican.”
Bingo!
The rest of your stuff is meandering. Romney appears to be close to squeaky clean personally. The big scandal was they once put one of their pets in a carrier on top of their car in a trip up to their place in NH. He works with the other side (well, he had to here in Mass., because the Dems have huge majorities in both houses). I think that he can be critical of Obama without being nasty or goofy. Of course, many here would miss the nastiness and the goofiness; so it goes.
But Marc and others are waiting for the New Jerusalem after the Apocalypse. Ain’t the world grand, though? There’s something here for everyone!
“pragmatic technocrats rather than partisan ideologues”
I guess that’s News-Speak for RINO!
Opportunist is another word that comes to mind.
Wayne: how much does he pay you to respond to every criticism about your guy? That talk ( in the shadow of the Statue of Liberty) was sooooo boring that even the lib press that loves him cut away. If you had listened to Rush play parts of his talk, and then parts of Reagan’s (who he was supposed to be channelling) it was a joke. He couldn’t carry Reagan’s brief case, he is such a dork!
He’s not my guy Goldi. I’ve made my preferences clear in an earlier post. Huntsman ranks second to last….out of 15. I still think he would be a BIG improvement over Obama.
Huntsman gave money to Harry Reid’s re-election campaign. That’s all we need to know about him.
The “republican base” as described by the posters herein doesn’t exist in enough numbers to be relevant. It’s a noisy collection of ideological reactionaries representing an increasingly diminishing constituency. The “base” is noticed only in that it gets attention picketing abortion clinics; the media savagely portrays all republicans as similar dimwits and most of you are all too happy to buy the portrayal because it makes you stupidly believe your cause is shared by others. It’s NOT. Or did the election of that idotic and worthless Kenyan escape your notice?
The goal of having elections is to WIN the damn thing, not lose with your head held falsely high, your tail between your legs, and confusion and hatred of the morally devoid (pick an excuse, pick any of them) electorate. Mr. Moran is clearly focused on winning. His far right mential midget detractors are busying themselves constructing the newest set of excuses showing why they lost.
PJM at this juncture is evidence that the far right partisans have officially jumped the shark. Mr. Moran is frickin’ genius. Y’all would do well to try listening with your ears and not a random orifice.
I tried to warn them. Nice post.
Wayne, you keep giving away your leftist leanings.
Not really rance. I just think randomengineer makes more sense that posters like you. Why don’t you tell us what your ideal candidate looks like? Does one even exist inside the Republican Party? So far the only pasts you’ve made on this thread makes you appear to be a Troll.
Nope. Did the 2010 elections escape your notice?
In Europe etc the parlimentary democracies allow for a no-confidence vote, and what you saw is the US version of that. No confidence (warning shot across the bow) is a referendum AGAINST, and in US politics, there really wasn’t another choice other than the gop.
Or did this escape YOUR notice?
But that pretty much refutes your thesis, doesn’t it? The constituency of the noisy ideologues, instead of shrinking, expanded to include quite a few Americans who decided that they’d sooner vote for a bitter clinger than a Democrat.
You might gotten some traction by positing that the GOP would be in trouble in 2016, when one way or another Barky won’t be on the ballot, or even with the notion that the theftists will throw him under the bus next year to retain their grasp on power. But the idea that a “pragmatic technocrat” is the only type of candidate that can prevail against a Democrat tsunami is patently ridiculous.
what is the point of “winning” with a candidate ultimately unable to begin the reigning in of Leviathan? not only will little be done but the flaccid nature inherent in trying to please everyone will become the example on which “conservatism” becomes defined and defeated in the next election cycle
people still presume both bushes to be “conservatives”
by running on a platform and, then, executing an administration based on a buffet selection of arbitrary “dishes” to appeal to the widest possible swath is a time tested and proven recipe for disaster
What the US center would vote for is a tendency for fiscal conservatism and ignore irrelevancies like gays getting hitched and the like. This appeals to the right’s fiscal conservatives, the center, and the Reagan democrat types. Face it, most Americans would like fiscal conservatism because most Americans self-identify as fisally conservative. Teachers unions wouldn’t, but big deal — they’re not exactly held in high regard by most Americans these days.
A gay marriage supporting, union busting, fiscally conservative energy policy expert who loves the troops would be the ideal candidate. (Ideal = winning candidate, just in case my earlier point wsn’t clear enough for you.)
Run an ideological pinhead guaranteeing to overturn abortion or in some other way ignores FISCAL issues like energy policy in favour of pointless social conservative “issues” (i.e. nonsense that isn’t important to 80% of the electorate but is important solely to social conservatives) and you can “enjoy” another 4 years of President Obama, widespread unemployment, and gas prices in the $10/gal range by 2015.
You have a choice. Make the smart one. The first order of business is getting rid of the Kenyan jackass and restoring the economy. You can argue about the rest of what you claim as your “value system” then. Until then, no.
Good heavens. Listen to Mr. Moran. He doesn’t make stuff up just to play with your head.
my only reply to this is- who is acting this way?
“Run an ideological pinhead guaranteeing to overturn abortion or in some other way ignores FISCAL issues like energy policy in favour of pointless social conservative “issues”
if i say i’m pro-life doesnt mean i’m overturning abortion
if i support marriage between a man and woman only doesnt mean my whole platform is “no gay marriage”
all conservative candidates/possibles are first and foremost against the federal spending– end of story; however, i do agree with you to an extent, our ideal candidate will confidently and deftly state their individual beliefs yet maneuver this into the philosophical/ideological debate between free markets and liberty versus collectivism and misery–
as far as what’s first i think you are going to fast
this is first a PRIMARY election– this means, theoretically, we get to SELECT our candidate and we have the invaluable piece of knowledge of how a wishy/washy republican (a la john mccain) will do against obama
let us look for our best candidate then decide who it is; we have a long time to look at the choices — no need to start compromising already
daxypoo,
The problem I’m seeing on this blog is a preponderance of contributors who believe Obama is no worse (in some cases better) than some of the Republicans running. And this coming from people claiming to be conservative patriotic Americans. History has never seen a President of this Country further to the left than Obama….. nor one who has done so much damage in as short a time. I would assert he is also the most dishonest and duplicitous President we’ve ever had. We ought to be able to debate the individual characteristics of Republican candidates without being asked to but out. Huntsman and Romney are my least favorite Republican choices…. yet some dismiss my posts as leftist. I know what a RINO looks like and I prefer someone more conservative. Yet we need RINO votes too if we’re going to give Obama the boot. He richly deserves the “Jimmy Carter Treatment” Reagan delivered back in the 80′s. Which Republican is best suited to deliver it?
all conservative candidates/possibles are first and foremost against the federal spending
WTF? I think it’s pretty well established that the money spent on overseas adventures would have been better spent here in the USA developing say 5 nuke power plants for each state. Energy = wealth. Always has been. And electricity from all those new plants coming online if things had been done right would be the sort of thing helping create US jobs and long term energy security. What are known as the “paleo conservatives” like J Pournelle were advocates of exactly this plan.
One the silliest canards ever uttered by a “right winger” is the notion that fiscal conservatism is a stoppage of federal spending. That’s nonsense. Ike spent like a drunken sailor but gave us the interstate system, an investment that has repaid itself many times over. Reagan upped defense spending bigtime, and not only did he topple the soviets, but the legacy of that buildup includes all manner of trickle down tech like GPS and the internet. Essentially Reagan spent the US to as much prosperity as it has ever known.
If you look at your history books the CONSERVATIVES were the folks who figured out how to spend such that everyone prospered, and always long rane strategic investment. The jackass Kenyan in office now speaks of “investment” in green technology, which is complete idiocy because a) it doesn’t work, and b) there’s no long term strategy. That’s how you know the left’s “investment” is pure BS. But the right does invest, and we all profit from it.
I don’t know where you guys on the far right come up with the notion that fiscal conservatism = spending stoppage, but it’s ahistorical nonsense.
The basic rule of politics is to reward your friends and punish your enemies. The country itself has to lurch along while the politicians do this and hope that in the shifting currents or rewarding and punishing various elements of out culture, that we can muddle on. In All the King’s Men, Willie Stark claims that you have to use the bad to help create the good, because that is what you are given to work with.
What a bore. When Fred Thompson ran in 2008, he was more exciting the Huntsman by far but was criticized by the MSM as dull, no fire in the belly, etc. Huntsman is the most boring of all the candidates but the msm loves him. Thompson was fairly conservative but Huntsman is a stuffed shirt.
Did you hear the comparison on Rush between Reagan’s announcment and Huntsman’s at the same location. Reagan had hundreds in his audience and Huntsman had about 10-15. He has a very naive look about him. He’s going nowhere.
According to Huntsman he supported cap and trade based on a consensus of governors. Although these days a consensus of governors is probably more accurate than a consensus of “scientists”, that is not a basis for accepting huge taxes on energy. It is like saying the science is settled because the governors know best. If Huntsman were to win, would we hear, “I worked for Barack Obama, and he said that _______, therefore that is right? And Mr. Huntsman, you might respect the office of the president, but saying that you respect the man now in that office is like saying that you respect the hit man who is about to terminate our freedoms.
I’m wracking my brain to come up with the names of all the old-breed Republicans who governed their states like partisan ideologues, but I’m having a tough time. Ronald Reagan perhaps? Nope, not even Ronnie. So I guess I don’t accept your premise, Moran.
Can any of the former chief executives in this current crop point to having left their states with a leaner, sleeker government, better run and more responsible to voters? If so, they need to point us to it and tell us how they got it done, in particular which conservative principles they applied to make it so.
I objected to my state taking “stimulus” money because it was a palliative for what ails us, not a cure, and one with many strings attached. For example, because California took federal money to pay state unemployment insurance benefits, it had to change the eligibility rules for collecting those benefits. And, surprise surprise, those new rules were much more liberal. Then when the federal money ran out, we had to start borrowing from the feds to pay those expanded benefits to the tune of $40 million a day (such a deal!). My objections were not the “political whims” of an “ideologue” and taking that stimulus money was not in the best interests of my state. So there.
The president is not the “governor” of the United States. So while I agree that prior successful executive experience is essential, I will need to see more from each of these gentlemen. If Huntsman has a good case to make, let him make it.
Palin left AK with a leaner, sleeker government. 11% smaller budget.
Jailed corruptocrats.
Bigger payouts to the folks from the Superfund, because of more money in it, because she made the oil companies pay more for the resources.
Use it or lose it meant more drilling and more jobs.
Bigger Caribou herds, because of the killing of wolves, so more hunting.
The ability to sue the government, which the Left then used against her.
She vetoed the gay-marriage ban law, because it was unconstitutional. She refused to let the courts sort it out at great time and expense.
And a $40 billion pipeline deal completed.
What’s not to like?
Oh. She’s stupid? Those do not look like the results of “stupid” to me.
So now we see…. Palin’s your gal. I would vote for her in a heartbeat over Obama. Her electability is in question…. but I think if she had run with a good Republican (someone other than McCain) she would have won. All those lefties would have to get themselves a decent job.
Pragmatic technocrat is a euphemism for liberal.
We must understand once and for all that “moderate” Republicans have contributed mightily to the plight we are in today. Yes, Obama greatly accelerated the process, and he deserves to be thrown out. But replacing him with a “pragmatic moderate” will merely somewhat slow our downward spiral. This is not an emotional thing. It is a reality.
Winning with a moderate is not winning.
We know the policies of the Left do not work. That has been amply demonstrated. Whether you agree or not that moderate Republicans are also left of center, it is clear that their policies, too, do not work. This has been amply demonstrated. For those who have forgotten:
Nixon gave us price controls. He gave us public employee unions. That’s right. He gave us the SEIU, and the teachers’ unions. Thanks a bunch, Dick!
Ford gave us a declining economy. He gave us Carter.
Bush I finished off the USSR by following Reagan’s lead. He also won Desert storm decisively, but did not make Saddam Hussein pay. He helped win the Cold War, and won a hot war handily. 90% approval rate at one point… and lost the election to Slick Willie. How? He gave the Dems their tax-rate hikes, and got saddled with the blame, and the resulting economic downturn. Thanks, HW!
Bush II gave us Medicare part D, unfunded. He gave us “No Child Left Behind”. He gave us massive spending increases, and more debt. He gave us minimal tax-rate cuts, back to his father’s tax rate levels, and thus, the pedestrian economic growth. He gave us Obama. Thanks, W!
In contrast, a Conservative Coolidge gave us a roaring economy. A Conservative Reagan gave us a good economy. A Conservative Congress gave us a good economy, by jamming the solution down Clinton’s lying throat.
Small government is the ONLY thing which works. Anything else is failure. So, how does electing more failure constitute “winning”? It’s not about “winning”. It is about results.
Marc,
Your best post so far. Thanks for bearing with us. Those that don’t know their history are destined (doomed) to repeat it. You know your history. I think the Country may be just about ready for another Coolidge. That Romney is leading in the polls is disturbing. But his support will not increase much from here forward. Huntsman’s candidacy may help with that. But who will be left standing when the dust clears? I hope it’s Herman Cain…. or Rick Perry or Sarah. There are other good men and women vying for it. Who is the Coolidge?
Nixon did plenty (EPA, OSHA, war on drugs), but I believe it was JFK who gave us federal public employees unions: Executive Order 10988
My bad. I must have confused it with something else Nixon passed in 1971, maybe the EPA. Thanks for the correction.
Well said. That should be on a bumper sticker.
Still, there are degrees of damage. Would a Romney or a Huntsman do more damage to us than a BHO? The answer to that depends on who holds the Congress. I think a RINO White House with a RINO Congress would be worse than an Obama White House and a Republican, even a RINO Congress.
A Dem White House and Congress is the worst possible scenario, of course, but what other combinations would be less bad, and by how much?
Huntsman is not our guy, neither is Romney. Much as JFK was feared because he was Catholic,,, (no southern Baptist wanted a WH ruled by Rome), neither does anyone want a WH run from Salt Lake City. Let’s face it, Mormons are a tight knit group, you are either Mormon or not. That will work against both of them.
We should hitch our wagons to another sort of conservative, one who has shown a consistent ability to create jobs, understand fiscal restraint, stimulate local economies, resist the temptation of beltway corruption, and get in Obama’s face on every major issue without looking like a racist. As far as I’m concerned that’s down to two people, Palin or Perry. Either one would get my vote and financial support should they choose to run. One of these two need to be drafted for the good of the country.
Regards the religion issue,,, Sarah Palin is not exempt from total religious class criticism, there are many who hold the fundamentals in contempt, calling them, “Holy Rollers”. Among the holier than thou, this is akin to the N word. Sad but true.
jbtx,
The devoutly religious make me uncomfortable….. especially when their running for President. Palin is a little bit that way. Bachmann too. But neither enough to concern me much. Romney and Huntsman are Mormon, but that wouldn’t keep me from voting for them. It’s their strong RINO tendencies that turn me off. Romney seems more devout than Huntsman. I haven’t seen zealous devotion in Rick Perry yet…. nor in Herman Cain for that matter. What’s wrong with Cain?
Wrong assesment Wayne. Palin is as devoutly religious as she is tolerant. Not so Michelle Bachmann as it seems.
Appart from that, even as an atheist I’m rather positively impressed with her religiousness and I’d be enthusiastically supporting her eventual drive to rechristianise America with the hope that the rest of the, so called, Western world (including my own Eunuchalia) would follow.
Nothing contradictory in my stand; It derives from the recognition of the obvious; Christianity is the spriritual basis of the Western civilisation.
Without it, we are going to perish.
Not to mention that Christianity along with the Western deomocracy is now under the attack of the forces of totalitarianism, so it is our collective obligation to defend both.
It happens that Palin is simply the best quallified both professionally and above all morally to lead the contrattack…
Bogdan,
In general, “devoutly religious” and “tolerance” are not two words I would find mutually compatible. Otherwise, I would generally agree with your assessment of Christianity and its influence on our Country.
What, you mean something like a conservative conservative? Someone who’s not a flaming RINO? Someone who has a clue about the Constitution? Someone who can be called a conservative without hysterical laughter following?
Philosophically speaking Huntsman is a progressive democrat, that will be his main obstacle to overcome to win the Republican nomination.
Exceller, nothing progresive nor democratic in selling own a**e to totalitarians
He is a dreamer-corporatists. An idiot who deludes himself that Obama shall reward him with permission to keep his own bilion in exhange for his service as a slave.
American coroporatists dream about controlling Obama and thus the entire America. Like German coropratists dreamed about controlling Hitler.
There is a difference between both though; Hitler was a genius. Obama is a moron controlled by someone else. But those who contlrol Obama are much more sinister than Odumba himself; They shall certainly not appreciate Huntsmann service and shall happily appropriate his bilion when the right time arrive.
Moran can’t help himself, he gets a hard-on for RINO’s.
This is “interesting” only to a RINO. There’s no mystery here. Huntsman is a RINO. The MSM continually plays up RINOs and ignores conservatives.
The Republican party fails to recognize that there are plenty of so-called RHINOS who are leaving the party in droves and becoming Independents. Not everyone thinka the morality pushed by the religious far right is the correct way for our government to go. There is no alternative for the group in the middle, not believing in “big Governmentr” or the intrusion of government in the lives of Americans.